> -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On > Behalf Of William T Goodall > Sent: Monday, September 04, 2006 10:52 AM > To: Killer Bs Discussion > Subject: Re: Religious freedom, but not that stupid argument > > > It is not part of the necessary definition of a religion that it > deal with the transcendental. You might wish it were so, but your > wishes do not make it so. Your continuing attempts to redefine words > to mean what you want them to mean are ridiculous.
One of the ways that we differ is that I believe that definitions of words are set by those that use the language...while you believe that words mean what William Goodall want them to mean and that everyone else is wrong if they differ with you. The word that comes to mind here is narcissistic. Just to check, I found a common source for definitions I haven't used before, and now quote it's definition of religion: Answers.com And I quote: <quote> re·li·gion (rĭ-lĭj'ən) n. 1a) Belief in and reverence for a supernatural power or powers regarded as creator and governor of the universe. 1b) A personal or institutionalized system grounded in such belief and worship. 2) The life or condition of a person in a religious order. 3) A set of beliefs, values, and practices based on the teachings of a spiritual leader. 4) A cause, principle, or activity pursued with zeal or conscientious devotion. <end quote> Now, #4 is consistent with Tom Cruise and Scientology, but it is also consistent with you and atheism. Indeed almost anything can qualify as a religion by definition #4...and I tend to think that's too broad of a category. I don't think most folks would consider golf or running a religion, although both are activities pursued with zeal or conscientious devotion. Thus, I think that these are religions only in the metaphorical sense. Dan M. _______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
